United Nations Security Council and General Assembly Responses to the Russian Invasion of Ukraine

United Nations Security Council and General Assembly Responses to the Russian Invasion of Ukraine

INSIGHTi

United Nations Security Council and General
Assembly Responses to the Russian Invasion
of Ukraine
March 7, 2022
Responding to Russia’s invasion of Ukraine, the U.N. Security Council and General Assembly have met
on several occasions to discuss possible action to address the conflict’s threat to international peace and
security. In the process, these organs have used procedures unused in the United Nations for 40 years.
Congress may consider examining the effect of these actions on U.S. obligations and those of U.N.
Member States.
Security Council Action
The U.N. Security Council is tasked with the primary authority to address threats to international peace
and security. The Security Council has met on several occasions to consider responses to Russia’s 2014
invasion and partial occupation of Ukraine. The recent Russian troop buildup and invasion of Ukraine has
spurred the Security Council to intensify its consideration of the situation, resulting in a number of
Council meetings.
The Security Council has the authority to adopt resolutions, obligating all Member States to carry out its
decisions. Pursuant to Chapter VI of the Charter, the Security Council can call upon parties to settle any
dispute by peaceful means, and can recommend actions to achieve settlement. Chapter VII empowers the
Council to determine breaches of the peace and acts of aggression and direct all U.N. Member States to
take necessary action, including the use of military force, to restore international peace and security. After
Russia began its invasion of Ukraine, the Council met on February 25 to consider a resolution submitted
by the United States and Albania determining Russia’s invasion to be an illegal act of aggression, and
“deciding” that Russia should immediately cease its use of force against Ukraine and withdraw. Adoption
of a substantive resolution in the Security Council requires an affirmative vote of nine members of the 15-
member Council, with the concurrence by vote, or abstention, of all five of the permanent members of the
Council (China, France, Russia, the United Kingdom, and the United States). After discussion in the
Council on February 25, the Council voted on the resolution. Although 11 members voted in favor, Russia
voted no, vetoing the resolution.
Congressional Research Service
https://crsreports.congress.gov
IN11876
CRS INSIGHT
Prepared for Members and
Committees of Congress

Congressional Research Service
2
In response to the Russian veto, on February 27, 2022, the Council considered a resolution to call an
emergency special session of the U.N. General Assembly, stating that the Security Council was prevented
from “exercising its primary responsibility for the maintenance of international peace and security.” Such
resolutions in the Council are considered procedural and therefore are not subject to permanent-member
veto. The Council adopted the resolution with 11 members voting yes, three abstaining, and Russia
casting the lone vote against. This was the first instance since 1982, and the eighth in history, where the
Council had called for such a session.
General Assembly Action
The 193-member U.N. General Assembly is the plenary body of the United Nations. On February 28,
2022, the Assembly convened a special emergency session on Russian aggression in Ukraine under
General Assembly resolution 377A(V), widely referred to as the “Uniting for Peace” (or U4P) resolution.
Originally adopted in 1950 to respond to Soviet vetoes in the Security Council during the Korean War, the
U4P resolution sets out procedure for the Assembly to immediately consider matters of international
peace and security when the Security Council is unable to act due to the lack of unanimity among its five
permanent members. Meetings pursuant to U4P can be initiated by Security Council or General Assembly
resolution. The convening of an emergency session under the framework of the U4P resolution is
relatively rare; since 1950, the Assembly has held 11 such sessions.
On March 3, the Assembly adopted a resolution on Russian aggression in Ukraine under U4P, which
affirms the Assembly’s commitment to Ukraine’s sovereignty and independence, deplores in the strongest
terms the aggression by Russia against Ukraine in violation of Article 2(4) of the U.N. Charter, and
demands that Russia immediately cease its use of force against Ukraine. The resolution passed with 141
in favor (including the United States) and five against (Belarus, Eritrea, North Korea, Russia, and Syria),
with 35 abstentions (including China, India, Pakistan, and South Africa). Adoption of a resolution
requires an affirmative vote by two-thirds of all members present and voting.
Broadly speaking, unlike Security Council resolutions, General Assembly resolutions, including those
adopted under the U4P framework, are recommendatory in nature and nonbinding. At the same time,
some observers maintain that General Assembly resolutions can hold significant political weight and
demonstrate the collective will of U.N. Member States.
Considerations for Continued U.N. Action
Both the Council and Assembly might continue to address aspects of the Russian invasion and its
consequences. For example, the Council has already met for a briefing on the humanitarian and refugee
crisis in Ukraine, and is to consider a resolution addressing this crisis. The Assembly has completed its
initial emergency special session but may resume the session to consider new developments. The United
States, its allies, and the majority of the international community might act in other U.N. bodies, such as
the Human Rights Council or selected U.N. specialized agencies. Russia’s obstruction of Security
Council action has given new momentum to arguments that the veto power is ill-suited to the principles of
the United Nations. Unsuccessful past proposals for reform might reemerge, calling for an end to the
preeminent position the permanent Security Council members, including the United States, occupy in the
United Nations. Russia’s participation in Security Council meetings and votes on the crisis, and its
continued participation and membership in the United Nations, could be challenged by a growing number
of member states.
While Congress and the executive branch cannot solely direct U.N. action, they have roles in shaping
policy in the U.N. system: Congress provides funding for U.S. contributions, conducts oversight of U.S.
participation in the United Nations, and confirms U.S. representatives to the United Nations through the

Congressional Research Service
3
Senate, while the executive branch represents and implements U.S. policy in U.N. fora. Looking ahead,
Members of Congress will have the opportunity to call on the executive branch and the United Nations to
effectively address the situation in Ukraine and oversee related decisionmaking.

Author Information

Luisa Blanchfield
Matthew C. Weed
Specialist in International Relations
Specialist in Foreign Policy Legislation

Congressional Research Service
4

Disclaimer
This document was prepared by the Congressional Research Service (CRS). CRS serves as nonpartisan shared staff
to congressional committees and Members of Congress. It operates solely at the behest of and under the direction of
Congress. Information in a CRS Report should not be relied upon for purposes other than public understanding of
information that has been provided by CRS to Members of Congress in connection with CRS’s institutional role.
CRS Reports, as a work of the United States Government, are not subject to copyright protection in the United
States. Any CRS Report may be reproduced and distributed in its entirety without permission from CRS. However,
as a CRS Report may include copyrighted images or material from a third party, you may need to obtain the
permission of the copyright holder if you wish to copy or otherwise use copyrighted material.

IN11876 · VERSION 2 · NEW